The first beta version (v0.05) of the JW Change plug-in is now available for public testing. It's available for download at a new area for beta versions at the Finale tips site: Downloads area, Plug-ins section, Beta Versions subsection at www.finaletips.nu

Providing beta versions on the tips site is a new test for me. I think it's a good thing to do for this particular plug-in, because it's so extensive compared to the other plug-ins I've done. (If everything goes well, I might provide beta versions of other future plug-ins.)

If you test/use the plug-in, please report all strange things you encounter. I know there are some bugs regarding the use of filters, but please report those bugs anyway. I would also like to know if you miss any feature - for example the editing support for rests/chords/fretboards are pretty basic in this beta.

You can send the reports by replying directly here in this thread (or use the FB group) - or send/e-mail a report to me privately.

In this beta, functions for editing stems, ties, accidentals, articulations and expressions are not included.

I expected to see an option for moving rest vertically under RESTS/Move and was disappointed that it wasn't there.

The plugin that comes with Finale for this chore is not modeless and can be a pain when working on dozens of cues. It would be nice if it were in JW Change (if not just to make the Rest/move feature seem more complete). Also, layer/voice selection options would make using JW Change faster (I know, I can select "show only active layer" when I want to run a command on any one layer but a few checkboxes within the plugin would be quicker, allow me to immediately see how my changes look next to the unprocessed layers and allow me to run the process on 2 or 3 layers at a time.)

Beta version 0.06 of JW Change is now available for download (in the "Beta Versions" section on the tips site). Updates in this beta are:* Objects moved off the page are now managed through "Presence" instead of "Visibility"* Dot/Visibility renamed to Dot/Presence* 'Beats' entry filter now works (only for non-composit time sigs at the moment)* Stems functionality is now enabled* Rests/Beaming added* Rests/Presence added* Rests/Float added* Rests/Displacement added* Augmentation Dots/Move now works

I hope at some point that MakeMusic considers making it a default inclusion with every Finale release.

To anyone writing harp parts that make heavy use of glissandi, this plugin is pure heaven.It used to take a lot of in and out of various tools (particularly the Special Tools) to get the write glissando notation, now, with this plugin, it's almost entirely within a single plugin.

The only thing missing now is an easy way of getting an augmentation dot that is "non functional".

When writing glisses, I make a 7-tuplet of 16th or 32nd notes, hide beam, make the 6 last notes 75%, hide their stems, and change the 1st notehead to whatever value I need (half note, whole note, quarter note.

Sometimes, however, it would be nice to have an augmentation dot that's purely graphical (and won't confuse HumanPlayback with a staccato mark!) and that is correctly placed and sized.

Michel R. E. said...Sometimes, however, it would be nice to have an augmentation dot that's purely graphical (and won't confuse HumanPlayback with a staccato mark!) and that is correctly placed and sized.

Ok Mike, I've now edited my forums settings a bit.

I'll add this idea to my list and see if I can get it to fit somewhere. This idea might have to be put in some other plug-in.

Jari,Think you can add Multimeasure Rests to this plugin? I'm thinking of a quicker way to shorten the multimeasure rest shape (and possibly overall width) when a clef change (or cue) appears at the end of it, just before the barline. Going in and out of the context menu when editing parts is annoying.

KennethKen said...Think you can add Multimeasure Rests to this plugin? I'm thinking of a quicker way to shorten the multimeasure rest shape (and possibly overall width) when a clef change (or cue) appears at the end of it, just before the barline. Going in and out of the context menu when editing parts is annoying.

I try to keep JW Change to handle "musical" contents. I might do another plug-in later on with layout stuff, that would include MM rest editing.

Version 0.08 of JW Change is now available. Please test the new vertical window resize feature thoroughly and report back to me if there are any UI problems or suggestions.New stuff in this beta are:* Vertical resize of the main window (does not stick after closing the window at this point) * Accidentals editing functionality (in the "Accidentals" container) is now available (including accidental filters) * New layer filters: Layers 2+3, Layers 3+4 * New entry filters: On quarter/8th/16th beats, and on Even-numbered entries * New tuplet shapes: "Always Show" and "Non-broken" are available in combinations with bracket/slur * Hidden noteheads (and accidentals) are now hidden by using the hidden font style (rather than changing the notehead/accidental shape)

Wiggy said...Jari, can you change the font of chord suffixes with this? The Method to do so in Finale is broken, and corrupts chords! If your PI handled this properly, it would be an absolute life saver!

If I would implement it, it would work on the region (which might result in additional chord suffix definitions). However, if so I would implement it for the functionality, not for fixing Finale bugs. Bug fixing has to be done by MM.

Without having tried Finale's version (and the bug you're mentioning), you maybe could work around the bug by adding an articulation definition first that uses the font you want to change to?

JW Change, beta version 0.10 is now available for download. It contains the following new things:* Filter "First in Measure" changed in functionality. New name: "Measure/Region Start"* Added filter "Beamed End"* Changed beaming of entries/rests to 4 different options. It can now break beams before and after entry.* The old function "Rests/Float" is replaced with "Rests/Position Style". Currently contains 9 different vertical positioning styles.

For this specific beta version, I would like some tester's comments on the "Rests/Position Style" feature, specifically the 7 bottom choices in the list. Do you miss some positioning style for rests? Other comments on this?

I'm not sure what I did to my rests in m.65 [Reh. F] but the Rest/Displacement function does not function as expected in these measures. The amount of displacement the whole rest moves (note: we're in 3/4 time here) seems different than the number of note stpes I requested. The file is attached (March of the Corn - Finale 2010 file opened in Finale 2012). Maybe you can figure out what's going on. I also seemed to have broken the function with a temporary file I created with Finale 2012a.

Will there be an option for "Unfloat rests"? Will there be a function to clear manual vertical positioning? Even though this exits in the "Move Rests..." plugin, including it in yours will maake you plugin seem more complete and prevent us from having to go into that other plugin (which is not modeless).

"On Bottom Staff Line" places whole rests on the second line. I can see you're trying to keep the position of rests relative so that "On Bottom Staff Line" is actually having rests position themselves around the bottom line (as if it were the default 3rd staff line) - meaning that most will sit on it but the whole rests will actually hang from the line above it. This explains why "Centered on Staff" still puts the whole notes on the 4th line. The wording was a bit misleading to me given that this is a plugin that allows you to move rest exactly where you want to and since, when I'm moving rests for a 2-part staff or for cues, I often do hang a whole rest from the the line that the other rests are sitting on. E.g., whole rest hangs from top line while others sit on it. Given the vertical clearance needed for everything other than whole and half rests this provides better readbility for the other part (and a whole rest seldom appears in the same measure and layer as other rests). I think "Above Bottom/Top Staff Line" is more accurate for all types of rests and the results won't surprise anyone. You could then change the "Far Below/Above Staff" option to simply "Above/Below Staff".

Are the 7 bottom choices under Rests/Position Style simply a hardwired verison of Rests/Displacement?

Will Clefs be added to the lineup of editable musical elements in this plugin? Specifically, changing the horizontal offset of mid-measure clefs.

KennethKen said...Think you can add Multimeasure Rests to this plugin? I'm thinking of a quicker way to shorten the multimeasure rest shape (and possibly overall width) when a clef change (or cue) appears at the end of it, just before the barline. Going in and out of the context menu when editing parts is annoying.

I try to keep JW Change to handle "musical" contents. I might do another plug-in later on with layout stuff, that would include MM rest editing.

May I humbly submit the argument that shortening the appearance of a multimeasure rest's shape (to make room for a cue or clef change) is akin to horizontal moving rests (to make room for other stuff) - which is provided for by the Change plugin.

Ken

(Although, I do realize that there may differences in the programming of such things from a developer's point of view. )

KennethKen said...* The plugin seems to only work on the first measure of music select.

Thanks! Bug was introduced in v0.10, will be gone in v0.11.

KennethKen said...* I'm not sure what I did to my rests in m.65 [Reh. F] but the Rest/Displacement function does not function as expected in these measures. The amount of displacement the whole rest moves (note: we're in 3/4 time here) seems different than the number of note stpes I requested. The file is attached (March of the Corn - Finale 2010 file opened in Finale 2012). Maybe you can figure out what's going on. I also seemed to have broken the function with a temporary file I created with Finale 2012a.

It's the nature of floating rests in Finale. A floating rest will not be affected by the displacement, so the "displayed displacement" for the layer 2 notes are actually 6 steps off (set in the Document Options). When rests are moveable, the displacement value is used instead of the layer options.

KennethKen said...* Will there be an option for "Unfloat rests"? Will there be a function to clear manual vertical positioning? Even though this exits in the "Move Rests..." plugin, including it in yours will maake you plugin seem more complete and prevent us from having to go into that other plugin (which is not modeless).

"Movable" is the positioning style that does the "unfloat rests". The manual positioning clears if you set the position style to "Float" again. In the next beta I'll add a "Float (Clear)" option as well, that will set the rest to float and also set the displacement to 0 (that doesn't make any visual difference compared to just set it to float, but if you later makes it moveable again it would show).

BTW, should it be "movable" or "moveable"?

KennethKen said...* "On Bottom Staff Line" places whole rests on the second line. I can see you're trying to keep the position of rests relative so that "On Bottom Staff Line" is actually having rests position themselves around the bottom line (as if it were the default 3rd staff line) - meaning that most will sit on it but the whole rests will actually hang from the line above it. This explains why "Centered on Staff" still puts the whole notes on the 4th line. The wording was a bit misleading to me given that this is a plugin that allows you to move rest exactly where you want to and since, when I'm moving rests for a 2-part staff or for cues, I often do hang a whole rest from the the line that the other rests are sitting on. E.g., whole rest hangs from top line while others sit on it. Given the vertical clearance needed for everything other than whole and half rests this provides better readbility for the other part (and a whole rest seldom appears in the same measure and layer as other rests). I think "Above Bottom/Top Staff Line" is more accurate for all types of rests and the results won't surprise anyone. You could then change the "Far Below/Above Staff" option to simply "Above/Below Staff".

Let's see if I got this right:* "Below Staff" should be named "Below Bottom Staff Line"?* "Far Below Staff" should be named "Below Staff"?* I'll remove the "On Bottom Staff Line", and replace this with "Static Displacement" (see below).

It currently assumes a 5-line staff, but these styles also take clef changes and transpositions into account. Rests/Displacement doesn't.

I'll add a different editing mode called "Static Displacement" (with the current lack of a better term, other suggestions? I don't want to use the word "absolute" here) where you can set the fixed displacement position relative to the top staff line. That way you can filter whole/half rests separately if you'll need a different positioning for them.

KennethKen said...Will Clefs be added to the lineup of editable musical elements in this plugin?

JW Change beta version 0.11 is now available for download, since there was a quite big introduced in 0.10 (where only note entries in the first measure in the selection were processed). Also, many modifications to rest editing in this new beta.

Changes in this version:* Fixed bug (introduced in beta v0.10) where only the first selected measure with entries was processed * The "Rests/Position Styles" has been changed into 8 options "Floating (Clear)", "Floating", "Movable", "Default-Centered on Staff", "Above Top Staff Line", "Below Bottom Staff Line", "Above Staff", "Below Staff" * "Rests/Static Displacement" added. With this, a "fixed" vertical position can be set for the rest (regardless of clef/transposition) where the Position Styles doesn't do the job. 0 would give the same result as the standard rest placement for a floating rest in one-layered music. * The word "Displacement:" is now fully visible on the Mac as well

KennethKen said...* I'm not sure what I did to my rests in m.65 [Reh. F] but the Rest/Displacement function does not function as expected in these measures. The amount of displacement the whole rest moves (note: we're in 3/4 time here) seems different than the number of note stpes I requested. The file is attached (March of the Corn - Finale 2010 file opened in Finale 2012). Maybe you can figure out what's going on. I also seemed to have broken the function with a temporary file I created with Finale 2012a.

It's the nature of floating rests in Finale. A floating rest will not be affected by the displacement, so the "displayed displacement" for the layer 2 notes are actually 6 steps off (set in the Document Options). When rests are moveable, the displacement value is used instead of the layer options.

"Movable" is the positioning style that does the "unfloat rests". The manual positioning clears if you set the position style to "Float" again. In the next beta I'll add a "Float (Clear)" option as well, that will set the rest to float and also set the displacement to 0 (that doesn't make any visual difference compared to just set it to float, but if you later makes it moveable again it would show).

Ok. I'm trying to wrap my head around this and try to suggests terms that allow my brain to reconcile what I'm seeing.

If the Rest/Displacement function does not affect the display of floating rests but does affect them if they are unfloated (either manual or through the plugin, I would clearly state that in the explaination of the option. Something like this:Sets the vertical displacement offset of of the rests (in note steps). Note: The verical displacement will not "display" on floating rests until their floating attribute is remove via the Speedy Edit Frame or JW Plugin Change/Rests/Position Style/Movable.Is it then adviseable to apply the "Movable" Position Stlye before doing any displacement so that the results are apparent?

When I see the term, "Floating (Clear)", as a position style it tells me that hitting Apply will "clear" the "floating" attribute of the rests. Since this is not the case and "clear" refers to clearing (putting "0" in) the displacement attribute of the rests, I would suggest using the term, "Floating (Clear Displacement)".

If Movable unfloats rests I would state that it does by using the term "Movable (Unfloat rests). However, I'm noticing that if I put a whole rest in a measure in both layers 1 & 2, it takes hitting "Apply" twice to unfloat the rest with this option. The first click doesn't appear to do anything and the second clicking of "Apply" places the rests under on the bottom staff line. Both the fact that it takes 2 clicks to unfloat the rests and that both rests move to the bottom line surprise and confuse me.

(BTW Both spelling are considered correct in most dictionaries. The Finale User's Manual uses "moveable" twice - once when talking about the Move Rests plugin - and uses "movable" 15 times. "Moveable" looks better to me and is therefore quicker for me to read even (though I'm using "movable" in this post) but either is ok.)

As far as naming the other options:

"Above Staff"[v0.11] can be changed "Far Above Staff"

"Above Top Staff Line"[v0.11] can change to "Above Staff". This looks too high to be referencing the top staff line.

"On Top Staff Line" [v0.10] (was displacement=10, I liked that option but you seem to have removed it) can change to "Above Top Staff Line". Yes, placing something "above staff" is also placing it above the top staff line but the title draws attention to the "top staff line" so I think users will better be able to predict what where the rest will be moved - just above the top staff line. This becomes more important with the lower options and different duration rests - see below.

What we're now missing is "On Bottom Staff Line"[v0.10] I think it was displacement=2 and I also liked this option). I would suggest renaming it to "Above Bottom Staff Line" so that it doesn't confuse people - as it did me - when a whole rest displays as hanging from the 2nd line (and not visually on the bottom staff line). (PS I just notice how weird Finale's 32nd rests look next to 16th and 8th rests. Are they really supposed to add "hooks" on the line above before adding them below the 16th rest "hook"?)

"Below Bottom Staff Line" is perfect. That's exactly were all types of rest appear - just below the bottom line.

"Below Staff" is perfect. Since the bottom staff line isn't mentioned I assume the rest will be plaved somewhat lower.

The verbage isn't as symetrical as you may like but it much easier for me to predict where rests - including/especially whole rests - are going to be repositioned. You may want to think about including a warning in the appropriate descriptions about the assumption of a 5-line staff or some users writing out percussion parts may get confused.

KennethKen said...If the Rest/Displacement function does not affect the display of floating rests but does affect them if they are unfloated (either manual or through the plugin, I would clearly state that in the explaination of the option. Something like this:Sets the vertical displacement offset of of the rests (in note steps). Note: The verical displacement will not "display" on floating rests until their floating attribute is remove via the Speedy Edit Frame or JW Plugin Change/Rests/Position Style/Movable.Is it then adviseable to apply the "Movable" Position Stlye before doing any displacement so that the results are apparent?

Rests/Displacement automatically unfloats the rest (to make sure the displacement shows up) for convenience, no need to do the additional step.

KennethKen said...the assumption of a 5-line staff or some users writing out percussion parts may get confused.

I consider it a "bug" that just 5-line staves are supported for correct rest placement. I'll implement support for it later on.

Thanks for you other comments! I'll look into each of these for the next beta release.

It currently assumes a 5-line staff, but these styles also take clef changes and transpositions into account. Rests/Displacement doesn't.

I'll add a different editing mode called "Static Displacement" (with the current lack of a better term, other suggestions? I don't want to use the word "absolute" here) where you can set the fixed displacement position relative to the top staff line. That way you can filter whole/half rests separately if you'll need a different positioning for them.

I don't think the difference between Displacement with "Relative" unchecked and Static Displacement is not clear enough. Maybe you can put in the description for Displacement something along the lines of the following:

Sets the vertical displacemenet offset of the rest (in note steps). When relative is unchecked transposition and clef are taken into account and the displacement number is measured from where a line equal to the sounding pitch of middle C would be notated. Therefore, the displacement for a concert pitched treble clef staff would be measured from the first ledger line belowthe staff; for a bass clef staff, the first ledger line above; and for a treble clef Horn in F staff, the 2 line.

I know, it's a bit wordy. But it would have saved me the last half hour trying to figure out what the heck was going on.